Evaluating a non-fiction text critically for Paper 2 Question 6 (AO4), judging how successfully the writer achieves an effect using the SITE focus (setting, ideas, themes, events) and supporting it with apt evidence.

What this dot point is asking

Question 6 is the critical evaluation question on Paper 2, worth fifteen marks, assessed on AO4: "evaluate texts critically and support this with appropriate textual references". It focuses on Text 2 (the second non-fiction text) and gives you a statement about an effect the writer creates, asking how successfully it is achieved. Like the Paper 1 evaluation, the key word is "successfully": you judge how well the writer pulls off the effect, not what the text says. Edexcel teachers often use the acronym SITE (setting, ideas, themes, events) to focus the evaluation on the content the question is about, rather than drifting into language analysis.

Evaluate "how well", not "how"

The decisive distinction on Question 6 is the same as on Paper 1 Question 4: evaluate success, do not analyse method. The Edexcel report is explicit that "the focus must be on 'how well' rather than 'how', which is AO2", and that technique references only count "if they support the critical judgement of the text". Lead every point with a judgement of how successfully the effect is created, and use evidence (and, sparingly, method) only to justify it.

Use the SITE focus

SITE (Setting, Ideas, Themes, Events) is a practical way to keep your evaluation on the content the question asks about. Instead of drifting into language analysis, evaluate how successfully the writer uses the setting, the ideas, the themes and the events to create the stated effect. Not every element is relevant to every question, so the Edexcel report advises choosing the SITE elements that matter for the text and the effect, rather than mechanically covering all four.

Sustain a detached critical overview

Top-band answers read as a confident, measured verdict held from start to finish. Use evaluative language ("the writer succeeds in", "convincingly", "this is powerfully done", "though this is undercut by"), choose apt and discriminating references, and keep returning to the question of success. A detached overview, one that can weigh a moment that works less well, or notice an effect bordering on excess, is what the top level rewards. The Edexcel report praises answers that judged a writer's admiration as "bordering on obsession", a detached evaluation rather than a simple agreement.

Try this

Q1. What do the letters SITE stand for, and what is their purpose on Question 6? [2 marks]

• Cue. Setting, Ideas, Themes, Events; they keep the evaluation focused on the content that creates the effect, rather than drifting into language analysis.

Q2. Why does analysing a writer's technique, on its own, score poorly on Question 6? [1 mark]

• Cue. Question 6 is AO4 (how well the effect succeeds); technique is AO2 and is credited only when it supports a critical judgement of success.